Choosing the wrong methodology for a carbon project is an expensive mistake. It affects verification costs, buyer access, credit prices, timeline to first issuance, and whether the project qualifies at all. The right choice depends on four things: what type of project it is, how large it is, where it is located, and who you expect to sell credits to.
Start with project type
Most project types have only one or two realistic methodology options. The Carbon Workbench Methodology Selector narrows the field immediately based on project category:
| Project type | Primary methodology routes |
|---|---|
| Biochar carbon removal | Puro.earth Biochar Method, Verra VM0044 |
| Improved cookstoves | Gold Standard AMS-II.G, Verra AMS-II.G |
| Safe water (household boiling reduction) | Gold Standard AMS-III.AV |
| Afforestation and reforestation | Verra VM0047, Gold Standard Land Use and Forests, Plan Vivo |
| Solar PV (grid-connected) | Gold Standard AMS-I.D, Verra ACM0002 |
| Borehole and clean water access | Gold Standard AMS-III.AV (extended) |
| Agricultural soil carbon | Verra VM0042, Gold Standard Soil Organic Carbon |
Then filter by scale
Gold Standard small-scale methodologies (AMS- prefixed) apply up to specific thresholds. Above those thresholds, large-scale methodologies or consolidated approaches are required. Puro.earth has minimum volume requirements that effectively exclude very small projects. Plan Vivo is specifically designed for community-scale projects and has no minimum, but buyer liquidity is lower. Scale also affects verification economics: smaller projects often find Gold Standard's fixed costs more manageable than Verra's percentage-based fee structure.
Try the selector
Use the full tool in The Carbon Workbench to save your recommendation and proceed directly into the relevant calculator.
Open full Methodology SelectorBuyer market and credit pricing
Puro.earth credits attract the highest prices in the CDR segment (£40-120/t for biochar) because the buyer base is specifically seeking high-permanence carbon dioxide removal. Gold Standard commands a premium over Verra for avoidance credits due to perceived quality and SDG co-benefit rigour. Verra VCS offers the deepest liquidity and widest buyer access, which matters for high-volume projects where achieving sale at a modest price is preferable to seeking a premium buyer for a smaller volume.
The registry comparison guide covers these trade-offs in more depth, including timeline to first issuance and typical validation cost differences.